[EMAIL PROTECTED]">Assert and (better) persuade, but please don't start something that looks like a code fork. No one is stopping you from improving XPCOM right now. AOL's paying people to work on a browser-suite, and not on XPCOM-in-itself, doesn't coerce you in the least. In fact, I'm looking for more owners for XPCOM.Gervase Markham wrote:Heck, why have a mozilla.org site? Why not call it
http://www.aol.com/netscape/projects/mozilla ?Because Mozilla isn't a division of AOL, or a part of Netscape, or one of
Netscape's projects. It's an independent entity.
While certainly true in the spirit of mozilla-the-organization, someone paid
for network connections, web servers, equipment space, and electricity
(getting that last one can be a challenge if your based in California right
now).
That "someone" has a LOT of influence over whats going on (not that there
is anything wrong with that). Everyone has their own agenda that exerts some
tension on a project's development. I'm just trying to assert mine here.
Let's cut the politics and the marketing (marketing is fine, later). We need certain bugs fixed to make XPCOM a system library. I'm working with [EMAIL PROTECTED] to get those bugs identified and scheduled against the Mozilla roadmap. If next week, a bunch of people start hacking similar fixes over at XPCOM.org, we have a fork, and at the least we have extra grunt-work tracking one another's repositories, trying to avoid forking every file, trying to cooperate between AOL/Netscape, Eazel, RedHat, Sun, IBM, and the many other corporate consumers of the Mozilla code *that mozilla.org is already chartered to coordinate and facilitate*.
Starting a new site does not help coordinate anything. It may be that XPCOM.org would then go on to attract great developers, and coordinate them well. If that has to happen because of some deficiency with mozilla.org, so be it. But there hasn't been any such deficiency! No one has refused a good patch that makes XPCOM more general, less browser-suite-centric, etc. -- to my knowledge. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
Without such good patches, no .org will succeed. So let's keep this technical until we have a "political problem" that deserved to be fixed, and that can be fixed without bad technical risks, such as code forks.
/be
